A few days ago I got around to reading a book I'd impulsively purchased at the grocery store about six months ago. It had a cute cover and a great back blurb so even though I hadn't read the author before I had to pick it up. The book was light and funny, exactly the kind of fish-out-of-water comedy plot I love to read, and was set in Las Vegas, which for some reason I like as a setting. (My first book, Cards Never Lie is partially set there too).
   The only weak part of the book was the actual romance! I never saw the charming heroine or the roguish hero fall in love! I never believed the reason they fell into bed together based on how the characters had been written, or that the marriage proposal was the culmination of a romantic process. I never liked how they treated each other. The heroine, especially, had lots of strong relationships so it wasn't like she was impaired that way.
   Ironically, I still liked the book, but no romance is a pretty huge flaw for a romance novel. I went out and checked Amazon to see what the reviews said. Interestingly enough, the Publishers Weekly review said exactly what I was thinking about this book, but the individual reviewers mostly gave it five stars. Maybe my problem is that I've been a book reviewer too long, rather than just a reader.
   But still. Shouldn't a romance novel be romantic? Don't our characters' actions have to be consistent with the personalities we give them?

 

What did you think of this article?

Liked
Disliked
No Opinion